汉译英,许多意合句变为形合句,增用了一个或几个connective之后,句子的总遣词却在减少,句子更趋简,非偶然现象也。
但是,connectives的使用,甚至一味使用connectives,译文是否就一定趋简吗?未必。
比读:
4.我北来后,他写了一信给我,信中说道,“我身体平安,惟膀子疼痛厉害,举箸提笔,诸多不便,大约大去之期不远矣。”
“散文”:After I
arrived in Beijing, he wrote me a letter, in which he says, “I’m
all right except for a severe pain in my arm. I even have trouble
using chopsticks or writing brushes. Perhaps it won’t be long now
before I depart this life.”
此译使用connectives堪称“前呼后拥”。如:after / in which / except for / or
等。但是,读来仍有“牵丝攀藤”的感觉!
杨戴之译:
After I came
north he wrote to me: “My health is all right, only my arm aches so
badly I find it hard to hold the pen. Probably the end is not far
away.”
两译字数之比:45:34。始料未及的是,后译使用的connective仅两个:after / so。
关注和分析so(that),令人茅塞顿开。
所谓connective,据其作用,可分为两类:一种是结构性的(structural
connectives),另一种是非结构性的(non-structural
connectives)。结构性的connective既折射句子内部逻辑关系,又是句子的框架性构件,“支撑”着英语句子,“一箭双雕”。后译的so(that)即属于structural
connectives。
而非结构性的connective乃句子的逻辑标记,是承接上下文之纽带。 如:
1/ After I
arrived in Beijing, he wrote me a letter, in which he says…
2/ After I
came north he wrote to me…
译1的in
which即非结构性connective,不反映逻辑关系,仅承上启下,使用了这样的connective,未必能简化表达,与译2的he
wrote me a letter之后使用的冒号相比,in which he
says徒增行文之字数矣。
structural
connectives,既反映逻辑关系,又承上启下,若用别的文字来取代structural
connectives,自然就多费笔墨。如:
1/ I’m all
right except for a severe pain in my arm. I even have trouble using
chopsticks or writing brushes.
2/ only my
arm aches so badly I find it hard to hold the pen.
译2中的so(that),即属于structural
connectives。so虽不起眼,作用却大!so不仅使“惟膀子疼痛厉害,举箸提笔,诸多不便”一句中隐含的因果关系“浮出水面”,令读者易懂,而且使句子结构豁然。而译1中的I
even have trouble using chopsticks or writing
brushes独立成句,有逻辑割裂感,宛如“前不着村,后不着店”一般。
当然,杨戴之译将“举箸提笔”译成to hold the pen,不见了“举箸”,咀嚼品评,反倒觉得“散文”之译“using
chopsticks or writing brushes”有点“烦”不可耐了!
汉英翻译,对“英语重形合,汉语重意合”的规律只有渺远印象是远不够的。光凭直觉使用connective,也未必能够简化表达的目的。
只有对汉语原句作一番逻辑梳理,并亮出结构性的connective,译文才会优势凸显。
汉语意合句,字面上“不动声色”,而内涵逻辑却丰富精彩。英译时,一不小心,就会滑入照字面直译的歧路,而不善使用形形色色的connectives,尤其是结构性的connectives。
如:
1/
早知今日,何必当初?
此乃隐含“条件”逻辑意味,英译不可却If:
If I had known it would come to this, I would have acted
differently.
2/ 他老是见异思迁。
此乃隐含“时间”逻辑意味,英译不可缺the moment:
He is always changing his mind the moment he sees something
new.
3/ 江山易改,本性难移。
此乃隐含“转折”逻辑意味,英译不可缺but:
It is easy to change rivers and mountains but hard to change a
person’s nature.
4/ 总之,前途是光明的,道路是曲折的。
此乃隐含“对比”逻辑意味,英译不可缺while:
In a word, while the prospects are bright, the road has twists and
turns.
若无识别汉语原文所隐含的逻辑关系的一双“火眼金睛”,译文之精神必不能抖擞。如:
5.我读到此处,在晶莹的泪光中,又看见那肥胖的,青布棉袍,黑布马褂的背影。唉!我不知何时再能与他相见!
从字面上看,此句之逻辑并未“显山露水”,但是,若不识其真面目(隐含“时间”逻辑意味),照字面“老实”翻译,那将获得怎样的译文呢?
“散文”:
Through the
glistening tears which these words had brought to my eyes I again
saw the back of father’s corpulent form in the dark blue
cotton-padded cloth long gown and the black cloth mandarin jacket.
Oh, how I long to see him again!
“又看见那肥胖的,青布棉袍,黑布马褂的背影”应该如何理解?其中隐藏着怎样的逻辑关系?这是一个需要结合上文细加推敲的问题。其“逻辑”背景是:当父亲离我而去的时候,我看见那肥胖的,青布棉袍,黑布马褂的背影。这个“逻辑”背景是全文之“眼”!汉语是成熟的语言,“当父亲离我而去的时候”不必明言,此意已经很自然地溶入字里行间,读者心领神会。但是,在英译时,译者就必须遵从英语表达习惯,应该化隐为显,变无为有。遗憾的是,“散文”显然没有注意到这一点,而是作了直译:I
again saw the back of father…句中的动宾搭配(saw /
back),基本“抄袭”汉语原句之动宾结构(看见/背影)。
反观杨戴之译:
When I read
this, through a mist of tears I saw his blue cotton-padded gown and
black jacket once more as his burly figure walked away from me.
Shall we ever meet again?
此译抛弃了原句的动宾结构,而是另起炉灶:saw / his blue cotton-padded gown and black
jacket。这样就腾出了使用connective的空间,译笔多有创意!果然,紧接着出现了一个as (典型的structural
connectives),清晰且有层次感地传递了“背影”出现的时间。as his burly figure walked away
from
me在原句里寻找不到相对应的字眼,却能在上文里寻找到此译的背景。由as引导的从句,贯通了上下文,并成功点题,把父亲的“背影”给译活了,这比单纯地写I
again saw the back of father…更让人喝彩!如果说,译文I again saw the back of
father…是死板的、平面的、孤立的,而译文I saw his blue cotton-padded gown and black
jacket once more as his burly figure walked away from
me则是鲜活的、立体的、融会贯通的!
英语的形合表达,竟有此妙处!始料未及!此外,我们不应忘记,一个as,省略了多少赘词,译文从43个单词缩减至33个!
加载中,请稍候......